我正致力于将单元测试集成到我所在团队的开发过程中,有一些人对此持怀疑态度。有什么好方法可以让团队中持怀疑态度的开发人员相信单元测试的价值?在我的具体情况下,我们将在添加功能或修复错误时添加单元测试。不幸的是,我们的代码库并不容易进行测试。


当前回答

你想说服谁?工程师还是经理?如果你试图说服你的工程师同事,我认为你最好的办法是迎合他们的愿望,让他们做出高质量的软件。有许多研究表明,它能发现漏洞,如果他们关心做好工作,这对他们来说就足够了。

如果您试图说服管理层,您将很可能不得不做一些成本/收益推理,说明未检测到的缺陷的成本大于编写测试的成本。一定要把不可转化的成本也包括在内,比如失去客户的信心等等。

其他回答

如果您现有的代码库本身不适合单元测试,并且它已经处于生产环境中,那么通过试图重构所有代码以使其具有单元可测试性,您可能会产生比解决更多的问题。

您最好将精力放在改进集成测试上。有很多代码在没有单元测试的情况下编写起来更简单,如果QA可以根据需求文档验证功能,那么就完成了。船。

在我的脑海中,最经典的例子就是嵌入到GridView的ASPX页面中的SqlDataReader。代码都在ASPX文件中。SQL位于存储过程中。你做什么单元测试?如果页面做了它应该做的事情,那么是否真的应该将其重新设计成几个层,以便实现自动化?

多年来,我一直试图说服人们,他们需要为自己的代码编写单元测试。无论他们是先编写测试(如TDD)还是在编写功能之后,我总是试图向他们解释对代码进行单元测试的所有好处。几乎没有人反对我。你不能否认一些显而易见的事情,任何聪明的人都会看到单元测试和TDD的好处。

单元测试的问题在于它需要行为上的改变,而要改变人们的行为是非常困难的。用语言,你会让很多人同意你的观点,但你不会看到他们做事的方式有太多变化。

你必须通过行动来说服人们。你的个人成功会比你的争论吸引更多的人。如果他们看到你不只是在谈论单元测试或TDD,而是在做你鼓吹的事情,而且你是成功的,人们就会试图模仿你。

You should also take on a lead role because no one writes unit test right the first time, so you may need to coach them on how to do it, show them the way, and the tools available to them. Help them while they write their first tests, review the tests they write on their own, and show them the tricks, idioms and patterns you've learned through your own experiences. After a while, they will start seeing the benefits on their own, and they will change their behavior to incorporate unit tests or TDD into their toolbox.

改变不会在一夜之间发生,但只要有一点耐心,你就可能实现你的目标。

单元测试的全部意义在于使测试变得简单。这是自动的。“make test”就完成了。如果您面临的问题之一是难以测试代码,那么这就是使用单元测试的最佳理由。

我在其他任何答案中都没有看到这一点,但我注意到的一件事是,我可以更快地调试。你不需要通过正确的步骤序列深入到你的应用程序中,只发现你犯了一个布尔错误,需要重新做一遍。使用单元测试,您可以直接进入正在调试的代码。

Yes - Unit Testing is definitely worth the effort but you should know it's not a silver bullet. Unit Testing is work and you will have to work to keep the test updated and relevant as code changes but the value offered is worth the effort you have to put in. The ability to refactor with impunity is a huge benefit as you can always validate functionality by running your tests after any change code. The trick is to not get too hung up on exactly the unit-of-work you're testing or how you are scaffolding test requirements and when a unit-test is really a functional test, etc. People will argue about this stuff for hours on end and the reality is that any testing you do as your write code is better than not doing it. The other axiom is about quality and not quantity - I have seen code-bases with 1000's of test that are essentially meaningless as the rest don't really test anything useful or anything domain specific like business rules, etc of the particular domain. I've also seen codebases with 30% code coverage but the tests were relevant, meaningful and really awesome as they tested the core functionality of the code it was written for and expressed how the code should be used.

在探索新的框架或代码库时,我最喜欢的一个技巧是为“它”编写单元测试,以发现事物是如何工作的。这是一个学习新事物的好方法,而不是阅读枯燥的文档:)